Transcript

1.
Personalized Mobile Search Engine
ABSTRACT
We propose a personalized mobile search engine, PMSE, that captures the users’ preferences in the form
of concepts by mining their clickthrough data. Due to the importance of location information in mobile search,
PMSE classifies these concepts into content concepts and location concepts. In addition, users’ locations
(positioned by GPS) are used to supplement the location concepts in PMSE. The user preferences are organized
in an ontology-based, multi-facet user profile, which are used to adapt a personalized ranking function for rank
adaptation of future search results. To characterize the diversity of the concepts associated with a query and
their relevances to the users need, four entropies are introduced to balance the weights between the content and
location facets. Based on the client-server model, we also present a detailed architecture and design for
implementation of PMSE. In our design, the client collects and stores locally the clickthrough data to protect
privacy, whereas heavy tasks such as concept extraction, training and reranking are performed at the PMSE
server. Moreover, we address the privacy issue by restricting the information in the user profile exposed to the
PMSE server with two privacy parameters. We prototype PMSE on the Google Android platform. Experimental
results show that PMSE significantly improves the precision comparing to the baseline.
GLOBALSOFT TECHNOLOGIES
IEEE PROJECTS & SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENTS
IEEE FINAL YEAR PROJECTS|IEEE ENGINEERING PROJECTS|IEEE STUDENTS PROJECTS|IEEE
BULK PROJECTS|BE/BTECH/ME/MTECH/MS/MCA PROJECTS|CSE/IT/ECE/EEE PROJECTS
CELL: +91 98495 39085, +91 99662 35788, +91 98495 57908, +91 97014 40401
Visit: www.finalyearprojects.org Mail to:ieeefinalsemprojects@gmail.com

2.
Existing System
A major problem in mobile search is that the interactions between the users and search engines are
limited by the small form factors of the mobile devices. As a result, mobile users tend to submit shorter, hence,
more ambiguous queries compared to their web search counterparts. In order to return highly relevant results to
the users, mobile search engines must be able to profile the users’ interests and personalize the search results
according to the users’ profiles. A practical approach to capturing a user’s interests for personalization is to
analyze the user’s clickthrough data. Leung, et. al., developed a search engine personalization method based on
users’ concept preferences and showed that it is more effective than methods that are based on page preferences.
However, most of the previous work assumed that all concepts are of the same type. Observing the need for
different types of concepts.
Disadvantage:
 Most commercial search engines return roughly the same results to all users. However,
different users may have different information needs even for the same query.
Proposed System:
Many existing personalized web search systems are based clickthrough data to determine users’
preferences. Joachims proposed to mine document preferences from clickthrough data. Later, Ng, et. al.
proposed to combine a spying technique together with a novel voting procedure to determine user preferences.
More recently, Leung, et. al. introduced an effective approach to predict users’ conceptual preferences from
clickthrough data for personalized query suggestions. Search queries can be classified as content (i.e., non-geo)
or location (i.e., geo) queries. Examples of locationqueries are “hong kong hotels”, “museums in london” and
“virginia historical sites”. In, Gan, et. al., developed a classifier to classify geo and non-geo queries. It was
found that a significant number of queries were location queries focusing on location information. In order to
handle the queries that focus on location information, a number of location-based search systems designed for
location queries have been proposed. Yokoji, et. al. proposed a location-based search system for web
documents. Location information were extracted from the web documents, which was converted into latitude-
longitude pairs.

3.
Advantages:
Personalization of search results is achieved by re-ranking search results returned by a standard search
engine based on proximity to the user’s interest model. The ability to recognize user interests in a
completely non-invasive way and the accuracy of personalized results are some of the major advantages
of our approach.

5.
MODULES”
1. User Interest Profiling.
2. Diversity and Concept Entropy.
3. User Preferences Extraction and Privacy Preservation.
4. Personalized Ranking Functions.
Modules Description
1. User Interest Profiling
PMSE uses “concepts” to model the interests and preferences of a user. Since location
information is important in mobile search, the concepts are further classified into two different types,
namely, content concepts and location concepts. The concepts are modeled as ontologies, in order to
capture the relationships between the concepts. We observe that the characteristics of the content
concepts and location concepts are different. Thus, we propose two different techniques for building the
content ontology and location ontology. The ontologies indicate a possible concept space arising from a
user’s queries, which are maintained along with the clickthrough data for future preference adaptation.
In PMSE, we adopt ontologies to model the concept space because they not only can represent concepts
but also capture the relationships between concepts. Due to the different characteristics of the content
concepts and location concepts.
2. Diversity and Concept Entropy
PMSE consists of a content facet and a location facet. In order to seamlessly integrate the preferences in
these two facets into one coherent personalization framework, an important issue we have to address is how
to weigh the content preference and location preference in the integration step. To address this issue, we
propose to adjust the weights of content preference and location preference based on their effectiveness in
the personalization process. For a given query issued by a particular user, if the personalization based on
preferences from the content facet is more effective than based on the

6.
preferences from the location facets, more weight should be put on the content-based preferences; and vice
versa.
3. User Preferences Extraction and Privacy Preservation
Given that the concepts and clickthrough data are collected from past search activities, user’s preference
can be learned. These search preferences, inform of a set of feature vectors, are to be submitted along
with future queries to the PMSE server for search result re-ranking. Instead of transmitting all the
detailed personal preference information to the server, PMSE allows the users to control the amount of
personal information exposed. In this section, we first review a preference mining
algorithms, namely SpyNB Method, that we adopt in PMSE, and then discuss how PMSE preserves user
privacy. SpyNB learns user behavior models from preferences extracted from clickthrough data.
Assuming that users only click on documents that are of interest to them, SpyNB treats the clicked
documents as positive samples, and predict reliable negative documents from the unlabeled (i.e.
unclicked) documents. To do the prediction, the “spy” technique incorporates a novel voting procedure
into Na¨ıve Bayes classifier to predict a negative set of documents from the unlabeled document set. The
details of the SpyNB method can be found in. Let P be the positive set, U the unlabeled set and PN the
predicted negative set (PN ⊂ U) obtained from the SpyNB method. SpyNB assumes that the user would
always prefer the positive set over the predicted negative set.
4. Personalized Ranking Functions
Upon reception of the user’s preferences, Ranking SVM (RSVM) is employed to learn a personalized
ranking function for rank adaptation of the search results according to the user content and location
preferences. For a given query, a set of content concepts and a set of location concepts are extracted
from the search results as the document features. Since each document can be represented by a feature
vector, it can be treated as a point in the feature space. Using the preference pairs as the input, RSVM
aims at finding a linear ranking function, which holds for as many document preference pairs as
possible. An adaptive implementation, SVM light available at, is used in our experiments. In the
following, we discuss two issues in the RSVM training process: 1) how to extract the feature vectors for
a document; 2) how to combine the content and location weight vectors into one integrated weight

8.
CONCLUSION
To adapt to the user mobility, we incorporated the user’s GPS locations in the personalization process. We
observed that GPS locations help to improve retrieval effectiveness, especially for location queries. We also
proposed two privacy parameters, minDistance and expRatio, to address privacy issues in PMSE by allowing
users to control the amount of personal information exposed to the PMSE server. The privacy parameters
facilitate smooth control of privacy exposure while maintaining good ranking quality. For future work, we will
investigate methods to exploit regular travel patterns and query patterns from the GPS and clickthrough data to
further enhance the personalization effectiveness of PMSE.